Official 3rd 3 Test - Perth

[BPBRB]

He,s technically very good. Has good footwork, and is brillant up to the stumps. There is very little difference in the keeping standards at first class level. Jones has been picked becuase he is a strong charactor, and has more natural ability with the bat than Read. Gilchrist wouldnt be in Australias top 3 keepers, but he averages 48 with the bat and thats what selectors are looking for. Dont be surprised if the Jones boy turns it on at the Waca tomorrow with a big score.

Gilchrist's batting "aura" is vanishing fast. Prior to the Ashes in England in 2005 his batting average was in the early to mid 50's by memory (52 or 54?) but has now dropped to 48. The same thing happened to Damien Martyn and Hayden's average is also dropping at about the same rate. Both Gilchrist and Hayden are on "shakey" ground IMO - more so Hayden as there are only 1 or 2 candidates that could replace a Keeper/batsman as opposed to a straight out batsman.

[blink]

I still think that the selectors will persist with both of them for at least the remainder of this series, but they had better wacth out because there are two players waiting in the wings who would easily fill the void that they would leave. Haddin for Gilchrist and Jaques for Hayden.

[Rik E Boy]

Let's sack the keeper becuase he's not averaging 60 like he used to. Let's piss off one of the most successful opening partnerships in cricket history because yesterday on a bowling deck (yes, look again) they only put on 47 for the first wicket. Haydos copped a beauty from Hoggard yesterday and Gilly had a good knock in the Adelaide test. You blokes sound like Duncan Fletcher.

Australia are a great team and great teams are not developed and maintained by reactionary selection policies. I don't believe Gilly should be given the arse either just because he can't maintain the frankly amazing batting average of his initial years of test cricket. His job is to keep wickets and if he can make a big score, then that is a bonus. Gilchrist has re-written the standards as to what is expected by wicket keepers and as such deserves to retire on his terms, when the time comes. 3 Keepers in Australia better than Gilchrist? No bloody way. I'll have a pound of whatever you have been smoking buddy.

regards,

REB

ps - Australia will win this test r
pps - I'd be stunned if Jones got a big score today, this wicket is jumping r

[mal]

After day one Australia finds itself in a strong winning position.
12 wickets on day one virtually extinguishes the draw.
Cant see England getting any more than 250 and then you
would expect Australia to get a 300+ lead and win on the 4th day.

BPRPB rightly mentioned the demise in Gilchrist + Hayden as they
they now become good test cricketers and not superstars.

Martyn was not missed as Symonds 26 exceeded the 21-11-4 the
retired Western Australian had made in the first 2 tests, and now
we have a player who can bowl and can save about 15 runs in the field.

Panesar took more wickets in an afternoon than Giles did for 2 tests, and
quite possibly for the series.
Every cricketing poster on SAFOOTY has been saying that he is a better
bowler than Giles, so how did the English selectors not select him ?

Australia need Brett Lee to find his best form which has alluded him for quite sometime.
My man Clark will bowl very well on this pitch.

This is a good test wicket, at last the bowlers have a chance in a batsmans world.

[Booney]

Good call REB.Symonds came in at a time when what the team required was for him to build an innings,for mine,yesterday was a God send for him.It could well have set his Test career up.Your point of him lacking some smarts held up firm.As Hussey has shown in his short career this takes patience and time,he did it again yesterday (Hussey).His first 6 or 10 took him 70 odd balls,then as he got in the swing of things he played his shots.

Roy has much to learn,and IMO he is getting picked for all the wrong reasons.If and when he does bowl,what will he bowl? Seam up? Spinners? The leaders showed here in Adelaide that they feel Michael Clarke has something to offer with the ball,he got quite a few overs,had no impact mind you but is a capable 5th bowler.

If Symonds is getting picked as the 4th seamer,the selectors have it all wrong.If he is getting picked as a Number 6,they have it all wrong again.

[BPBRB]

Let's sack the keeper becuase he's not averaging 60 like he used to. Let's piss off one of the most successful opening partnerships in cricket history because yesterday on a bowling deck (yes, look again) they only put on 47 for the first wicket. Haydos copped a beauty from Hoggard yesterday and Gilly had a good knock in the Adelaide test. You blokes sound like Duncan Fletcher.

Australia are a great team and great teams are not developed and maintained by reactionary selection policies. I don't believe Gilly should be given the arse either just because he can't maintain the frankly amazing batting average of his initial years of test cricket. His job is to keep wickets and if he can make a big score, then that is a bonus. Gilchrist has re-written the standards as to what is expected by wicket keepers and as such deserves to retire on his terms, when the time comes. 3 Keepers in Australia better than Gilchrist? No bloody way. I'll have a pound of whatever you have been smoking buddy.

regards,

REB

ps - Australia will win this test r
pps - I'd be stunned if Jones got a big score today, this wicket is jumping r

Why do put regards on the end of your post when you have a crack at someone else's opinion??? For what it is worth I never called for Gilly's sacking just noting that he is not performing to the standard he once did which happens to most players in any sport as they near the end of their careers and don't forget no player is indispensible.

You can't keep making excuse's for Hayden - even the experts are questioning his attack at all costs strategy which hasn't worked for quite a few tests. He has played some very average shots this summer to get out regardless of the bowling.

There - my opinion again.

[blink]

If Symonds is getting picked as the 4th seamer,the selectors have it all wrong. If he is getting picked as a Number 6,they have it all wrong again.

I tend to agree with you Boon, but it comes down to the old argument - does Australia need an allrounder? The same theory could be applied to Watson, although he does fair slightly better as the 4th seamer than Symonds.

Australia has been the most dominant team of the last 15 years without an allrounder. Why not play a batsman @ 6 (Jaques/Voges etc.) when the pitch is a road, or play a 4th seamer (Johnson/Tait etc.) when it is green or pacey, or play a 2nd spinner (MacGill/Cullen) when it will be a turner?

[Rik E Boy]

Why do put regards on the end of your post when you have a crack at someone else's opinion??? For what it is worth I never called for Gilly's his sacking just noting that he is not performing to the stqandard he once did which happens to most players in any sport as they near the end of their careers and don't forget no player is indispensible.

You can't keep making excuse's for Hayden - even the experts are questioning his attack at all costs strategy which hasn't worked for quite a few tests. He has played some very average shots this summer to get out regardless of the bowling.

There - my opinion again.

Hi BP. I put regards at the end of my post because even though I do disagree with your opinion I respect your right to your own opinion. 'Having a crack' at someone's opinion is really just having an opinion of their own after all. I agree that no player is indispensible and that Hayden's output is down but let's judge Hayden on the whole series..he has looked good without going on with it so far. He seems to be getting an edge to balls that Justin Langer in particular is playing and missing at. 'Experts' questioning his attack at all costs policy..well, most of those experts are in fact former players who get paid to have an opinion (lucky sods, that's what I get for being no good at cricket) and look how often they sound like a pack of sheep and come up with the same line..doesn't make it right though does it? If I offended you with the 'whatever you're smoking' comment, I sincerely and unreservedly apologise for that.

regards,

REB

[Rik E Boy]

If Symonds is getting picked as the 4th seamer,the selectors have it all wrong. If he is getting picked as a Number 6,they have it all wrong again.

I tend to agree with you Boon, but it comes down to the old argument - does Australia need an allrounder? The same theory could be applied to Watson, although he does fair slightly better as the 4th seamer than Symonds.

Australia has been the most dominant team of the last 15 years without an allrounder. Why not play a batsman @ 6 (Jaques/Voges etc.) when the pitch is a road, or play a 4th seamer (Johnson/Tait etc.) when it is green or pacey, or play a 2nd spinner (MacGill/Cullen) when it will be a turner?

That is because of Warne and McGrath. We won't be able to replicate the wickets that these two have taken over a decade and a half with just two bowlers, hence the need for an allrounder.

regards,

REB

[matt]

Some good debate here.
REB, you are spot on re Symonds.
The gulf in class in test 'batsmenship' was never more evident than in the comparitive cases of Hussey and Symonds. One is playing in their 14th test and one in their 11th. One will go on to play 50+ the other will remain on 11.
Sad for Symonds and his legion of fans but it would take something out of this world to save his test career from here.

[whufc]

One thing i find interesting about the current middle order of Hussey, Clarke, Symonds, Gilchrist and then Warne and Lee is apart from Hussey what do the rest have in common?

That all the above batsmen apart from Hussey are solely out and out attacking batsmen and don't have any real defensive side to their game. If you had to have a batsmen batting for your life none of them would be in your top 2000 cricketers i would be right in saying.

As in yesterday's first innings i think all we needed was someone like Hussey to come in at number five or six and build an innning around Hussey yesterday, if that makes any sense.

There is a great chance this line-up will work and score many big scores but i do fear we are one gritty, determined, partnership building batsmen short. My solution would be to swap Clarke to number 4 and Hussey to number 5 were if we are in early strife he will occupy the crease and build with the estableshed batsmen.

[am Bays]

Good point whufc, we are missing a batsman like Taylor/ Border/S Waugh and to a lesser extent D Boon who can bat ugly and the others can bat around....

M Love is the only bloke i can think of at them minute around the country who can fill that role, interseting to note in his 2nd last shield game he cranked out 180 + on the WACA....

[blink]

You make a good point there whfuc, another batsman like Hussey who can both attack and defend brilliantly when required would be beneficial for Australia in circumstances like yesterday. This is where Martyn has left a bit of a hole. The batsmen waiting in the wings Jaques, Voges, Cosgrove, Haddin, North and others are mostly attacking batsman. The only name that springs to mind as someone who can build and craft an innings is Brad Hodge, but he is currently injured and doesn't look like playing international cricket again any time soon.

[mal]

Guys unbelievably poor chatter
Australia has attacking batsman who win test after test after test after test........
They compliment the great bowling attack.

[mighty_tiger_79]

MAL

we acknowledge that AUSTRALIA has attacking batsmen but there are situations where attacking isnt the best style of play.

[Booney]

Guys unbelievably poor chatter
Australia has attacking batsman who win test after test after test after test........
They compliment the great bowling attack.

May I remind you of the two days you spent criticising Pontings captaincy the day after we won the first test?

Poor chatter indeed.

[Aerie]

I think Clarke has the capabilities to bat ugly to save a game. We also saw Cosgrove bat a day for the Redbacks earlier this season to try to save a game so a good batsman can do it. Symonds I'm not sure could do this and Gilchrist is just out of form. Gillespie was always a great player to hang around so his batting down the order will be missed, Lee has shown some of these qualities as well.

It's an interesting point raised. I think a few years ago selectors had Katich down to play this role, but he never made it properly.

[whufc]

Guys unbelievably poor chatter
Australia has attacking batsman who win test after test after test after test........
They compliment the great bowling attack.

Australia have won test after test after test but let's be honest the standard of test cricket nations the last five years has been very sub par. In recent times though countries such as England, and Pakistan, even India are building very strong bowling attacks, this is where the true test is at of our batting order.

Also it's alot easier to go out and be attacking and carefree when you have Warne and McGrath bowling sides out reguarly for 250. There coming to the end of their careers and Australia will need to make 400+ to stand any chance of winning tests

[Max]

Batsmen will prevent you losing a test. Good bowlers will win them. It is the bowlers that have been the shining light of this team for the past 10-years.

REB I agree with your posts here. Good common sense.

[Aerie]

Strauss is the Martyn of 2005. Shocking umpiring decisions. I hope Healy loses his voice box fairly soon. Possibly the worst commentator of any sport in the history of television. Have resorted to playing the Beatles Love CD I have bought Dad for Christmas and putting the tv on mute.